Affiliates

Site Tracking

October 20, 2005

HMRC and government in general could do worse than take a 5-minute tour of the US's IRS e-filing website. This is a really easy way to work through the messages which are clear, unambiguous and comforting. There is one tiny usability issue. You have to know that you click on the Individual, Business or Tax Preparers buttons in the left hand pane.

Who fancies letting the suits in Whitehall know about this?

I'll have to ask some of my US colleagues what it's like to use in the real world when I'm in Florida next week (Hurricane Wilma permitting) for TIBCO Software's TUCON conference.

October 17, 2005

"The use of OCR is the issueI was aware that the reason for
not approving a facsimile version was that the form would be OCR
processed, and that structurally HMRC have an issue with control over
user printed forms for OCR processing, and therefore do not approve
printed facsimiles. This is exactly the issue."

But this is still confusing. She then goes on to say:

"By deciding to go down
the OCR route - and I agree, if I were at HMRC it would definitely be
my answer to processing costs and errors, a decision has been made
which has a significant effect on users. The only options for advisers
are to file online or to transcribe manually onto HMRC issue forms."

I then spoke with Valerie Murrel who was at a recent HMRC meeting. She believes HMRC is not aware of the growing burden of of bureaucracy as a cost that is becoming increasingly difficult to pass on to clients. Moreover, she says compliance cost is something about which clients are becoming increasingly resentful.

There are problems with this argument. It:

Ignores the possibility of innovation.

Assumes the status quo on the part of the profession. This is reactionary.

Is clear there is a gaping void between HMRC and representatives of the profession and other interested parties.

Here's an alternative view. If you are:

In the compliance game then your business has to be automated and you must have super slick processes. If not, then you have no chance of making money.

One of the vast majority of practices where compliance is 70% of your business then great. The other 30% beats the 80/20 Pareto rule. You're already on your way to doing something extraordinary.

In the second group, you've to do the same as the first group so you're cost profile for the compliance work diminishes and your opportunities to differentiate improve.

That's a different way to look at this.

In the meantime, I want to make it clear that I 100% support anyone who is actively promoting client interests at government level. It is clients who have to comply not us and if the situation reaches a point where they refuse, then government should be aware of that risk.

What I don't support though is a profession that is self-serving to the point of being considered an irrelevancy. That's what's happening at the moment.

October 11, 2005

Rebecca Benneyworth provides a detailed analysis of the practical software issues behind the move towards FBI. Reading her article, there seems little doubt the problem is being put firmly in the hands of you as practitioners and your software suppliers.

This is not good. But you make up your own mind and decide whether you think the phasing out of ELS is a good thing at this time.

People We Like

GapingvoidOutrageous blog pimp/whore Hugh McLeod's anarchic look at the world of advertising and 'Cluetrain/Hughtrain' thinking. He's a change agent but you need to read his stuff with the door closed!

Extreme AccountingCODA's PR department went bonkers when they created this. Since which it has taken on a life of its own.